educator - national council on teacher quality

Evaluation Handbook

2016-17

Educator

CITY OF CHICAGO

Rahm Emanuel

Mayor

CITY BOARD OF EDUCATION

Frank Clark

President

Jaime Guzman

Vice President

Members:

Gail D. Ward

Dominique Jordan Turner

Rev. Michael J. Garazini, S.J.

Mahalia Hines

Mark F. Furlong

CHICAGO PUBLIC SCHOOLS

Forrest Claypool

Chief Executive Officer

Matthew Lyons

Chief Talent Officer

REACH Students Overview Acknowledgments

Educator Evaluation Handbook 2016-17

We gratefully acknowledge the encouragement and expertise contributed by the following individuals

and departments in support of the creation of this Handbook: Sara Abu-Rumman, Lauren Clair-

Mcclellan, Ryan Crosby, Annamae Heiman, LaShonda Hicks-Curry, Mike Herring, Peter Leonard,

S. B.Loder, Joe Moriarty, Thi Nguyen, Lisa Perez, Amanda Smith, the Office of School Counseling and

Postsecondary Advising, the Talent Office, the Office of Strategy, Research and Accountability, the Office

of Professional Learning and the Office of Teaching and Learning.

In addition we thank the teachers and administrators of Chicago Public Schools for the work they do

every day to advance our students toward success in college, career and life.

© 2016, Chicago Public Schools. All Rights Reserved.


Educator Evaluation Handbook Table of Contents

REACH Students Overview

Multiple Measures of REACH Students .................................................................... 8

Timeline 2014–15 .................................................................................................. 12

Professional Practice

CPS Framework for Teaching ................................................................................ 14

Levels of Performance ........................................................................................... 19

Critical Attributes .................................................................................................. 20

Evaluation Plan ...................................................................................................... 22

Formal Observations ............................................................................................. 23

Informal Observations ........................................................................................... 28

Professional Responsibilities .................................................................................. 29

Reflect and Learn System ...................................................................................... 31

FAQs ...................................................................................................................... 32

Student Growth

Performance Tasks ................................................................................................ 36

Value-Added Measures ......................................................................................... 39

Classroom Roster Verification and Performance Task Verification ...................... 41

FAQs ...................................................................................................................... 43

Evaluation Summary Report

Overview ............................................................................................................... 46

Clarifying Terminology .......................................................................................... 48

Counselor Practice

CPS Framework for School Counselors………………………………………………………………50

FAQs ........................................................................................................................... 53



Educator Evaluation Handbook Table of Contents

Additional Frameworks: Educational Support Specialists and Teacher-Librarians

Educational Support Specialists............................................................................. 55

Teacher-Librarians ..................................................................................................... 57

FAQs ........................................................................................................................... 58

Employment Considerations

Evaluation Plans for Tenured Educators ……………………………………………………………..60

Probationary Appointed Teacher (PAT) Tenure Rules .......................................... 61

Professional Development Plan and Remediation Plan…………………………………….. 63

Grievance and Appeals Process ............................................................................. 66

FAQs ........................................................................................................................... 67

Resources

Knowledge Center……………………………….……………………………………………………………..69

CTU Quest Center………………………………. ……………………………………………………………..70


REACH Students

Overview

REACH Students Overview Journey to an Improved Evaluation System


Save for Letter from MH

© 2016, Chicago Public Schools. All Rights Reserved


REACH Students Overview Multiple Measures of REACH Students

Classroom Educators

For teachers and librarians, there are two components to the system: Professional Practice and

Student Growth.

Professional Practice is measured using a discipline-specific CPS Framework, one each for teachers

and teacher-librarians.

Student Growth is measured in two ways, in most cases:

REACH Students Performance Tasks

Value-Added using standardized assessment growth


https://sites.google.com/a/cps.edu/kc/curriculum/instruction/The%20CPS%20Framework%20for%20Teaching_20130827.pdf?attredirects=0&d=1

https://sites.google.com/a/cps.edu/kc/curriculum/cps-framework-for-non-classroom-teachers/teacher-librarians



Non Classroom Educators and Related Service Providers

Educators evaluated using the Frameworks below will receive a final rating based solely on Professional

Practice. Professional Practice is measured using the appropriate discipline-specific Framework.

School Counselors

Educational Support Specialists

School Nursing

School Social Work

Speech-Language Pathology

School Psychology

Information regarding the RSP evaluation policies and procedures is available on the Knowledge Center.


https://sites.google.com/a/cps.edu/kc/curriculum/cps-framework-for-non-classroom-teachers/school-counselors-framework

https://sites.google.com/a/cps.edu/kc/curriculum/cps-framework-for-non-classroom-teachers/educational-support-specialists

https://sites.google.com/a/cps.edu/kc/curriculum/cps-framework-for-non-classroom-teachers/school-nurses

https://sites.google.com/a/cps.edu/kc/curriculum/cps-framework-for-non-classroom-teachers/social-work

https://sites.google.com/a/cps.edu/kc/curriculum/cps-framework-for-non-classroom-teachers/speech-language-pathology

https://sites.google.com/a/cps.edu/kc/curriculum/cps-framework-for-non-classroom-teachers/psychology

https://sites.google.com/a/cps.edu/kc/reach-students/related-service-providers-rsp



The table below places educators into categories aligned with their multiple measures percentage weights.

Professional Educators Practice

Student Growth Performance

Tasks Value- Added

Category A: Elementary Grade 3–8 educators who teach English, Reading, Math, including teachers of diverse learners

70% 10% 20% Individual

Category B: Elementary PreK–Grade 2 educators, including teachers of diverse learners who teach only students in PreK–Grade 2

70% 30% based on 2

Performance Tasks

Category C: Elementary Grade 3– 8 educators of non-tested subjects such as Science, Social Science, Fine Arts, Physical Education, including teachers of diverse learners and Teacher-Librarians

70% 20% 10% School-

wide Literacy

Category D: High School educators 70% 30% based on 2

Performance Tasks

Category E: Counselors, Related Service Providers (RSP), Educational Support S pecialists (ESS)

100%

Student Growth Notes

Value added scores are calculated based on student performance on NWEA MAP for elementary school teachers.

Value Added Notes

An educator will receive individual VAM if:

He/she teaches grades 3-8.

He/she provides instruction in Reading or Math for ten or more students as determined through Roster Verification

Students have valid pre- and post-test scores (spring to spring).

He/she must have taught in six or more months during the school year.




Educators will receive school wide Literacy VAM if:

He/she does not have individual VAM and the majority of students for whom he/she provided instruction are in grades 3-8.

School wide VAM is calculated based on the performance of all students in the school who took a pre- and post-reading test (spring to spring).

Students who take the Dynamic Learning Maps (DLM) Alternate Assessment, formerly IAA, or who receive scores below 3.5 on ACCESS Literacy are excluded from all VAM calculations.

Performance Task Notes

An educator will receive credit for a student’s growth on Performance Tasks for purposes of his/her

REACH evaluation if:

Student has BOY task scores entered in the CIM system during an approved BOY or MOY window.

Student has EOY task scores entered in the matching EOY task code in the CIM system during the

approved EOY window.

The teacher verifies the student and task in the Performance Task Verification process in the Battelle

for Kids system.

Teachers who are eligible to receive a REACH rating who are in a school for fewer than 100 instructional

days will no longer receive the “missing data” score of 3.12 for the REACH PT growth portion of their

evaluation. In an effort to base Summative scores solely on existing data, the scores will be calculated

based on available Value-added scores and/or Professional Practice results.

All teachers in a school for 100 or more instructional days are expected to ensure their students satisfy

the above three conditions to receive credit for student growth on Performance Tasks.

It is imperative that the Roster Verification is carefully entered and closely monitored.


https://sites.google.com/a/cps.edu/kc/reach-students/roster-verification


REACH Students Overview Timeline 2016-17


Professional Practice

Professional Practice CPS Framework for Teaching


The Four Domains

The CPS Framework for Teaching is a modified version of Charlotte Danielson’s Framework for

Teaching. It was developed in collaboration with the CTU. The CPS Framework for Teaching organizes

the work of teachers into four numbered sections called domains. The four domains are described in

the graphic below.






For the purpose for calculating a Professional Practice score, the following are the weights for each

domain.




Domain and Component Table

Each domain contains four or five lettered components. Educators receive ratings at the component

level following Formal and Informal Observations.

Domain 1: Planning and Preparation Domain 2: Classroom Environment

1a: Demonstrating Knowledge of Content

and Pedagogy

2a: Creating an Environment of Respect

and Rapport

1b: Demonstrating Knowledge of Students 2b: Establishing a Culture for Learning

1c: Selecting Learning Objectives 2c: Managing Classroom Procedures

1d: Designing Coherent Instruction 2d: Managing Student Behavior

1e: Designing Student Assessment

Domain 4: Professional Responsibilities Domain 3: Instruction

4a: Reflecting on Teaching and Learning 3a:Communicating with Students

4b: Maintaining Accurate Records 3b: Using Questioning and Discussion

Techniques

4c: Communicating with Families 3c: Engaging Students in Learning

4d: Growing and Developing Professionally 3d: Using Assessment in Instruction

4e: Demonstrating Professionalism 3e: Demonstrating Flexibility and

Responsiveness




Framework Vocabulary: Domain, Component and Element

The CPS Framework for Teaching is organized in three levels: Domain, Component, and Element.


4 Domains

19

70 Elements




Educators should check their assigned Framework in the Reflect

and Learn System (RLS) to ensure it is correct. If you have any

questions about what you see in RLS, check with a school

administrator. If you need technical assistance with RLS, call the

Help Desk at (773) 553-3925.

The CPS Framework for Teaching Companion Guide lists unique

characteristics of teaching practice for the content area/settings,

as well as examples of practice at the Proficient and Distinguished

levels of performance. Educators and school administrators may

wish to use these resources as a reference when reflecting on

practice and during the REACH observation cycle.

The following Addenda are available on the Knowledge Center: Arts

Addendum, English Language Learner Addendum, Physical

Education Addendum, Preschool Addendum, and Special Education

Addendum. Educators and evaluators will benefit from referencing

these materials during Pre- and Post-Observation Conferences.


https://reflectandlearn.cps.edu/



https://sites.google.com/a/cps.edu/kc/curriculum/instruction/Companion%20Guide%202.0_20140827.pdf?attredirects=0&d=1

http://kc.cps.edu/

https://sites.google.com/a/cps.edu/kc/curriculum/instruction/arts-addendum/Arts%20CPS%20Addendum_20130923.pdf?attredirects=0&d=1



https://sites.google.com/a/cps.edu/kc/curriculum/instruction/english-language-learner-addendum/ELL%20CPS%20Addendum_20131018%20%282%29.pdf?attredirects=0&d=1

https://sites.google.com/a/cps.edu/kc/curriculum/instruction/physical-education-addendum



https://sites.google.com/a/cps.edu/kc/curriculum/instruction/preschool-addendum/Preschool%20Addendum_%2020140306.pdf?attredirects=0&d=1

https://sites.google.com/a/cps.edu/kc/curriculum/instruction/special-education-addendum/SPED%20Addendum_20131028.pdf?attredirects=0&d=1




Professional Practice Levels of Performance

CPS Frameworks are rubrics that describe professional practice across a continuum for each

component. The levels of performance of the CPS Frameworks are Distinguished, Proficient, Basic, and

Unsatisfactory. It is important to recognize that levels of performance refer to educator practice, not

the educator.

Level of Performance

Unsatisfactory Basic Proficient Distinguished

Refers to teaching that does not

convey understanding of

the concepts underlying the

component. Teachers whose practice falls into

this level of performance are doing academic

harm in the classroom.

Refers to teaching

practice that demonstrates the necessary

knowledge and skills to be

effective, but its application is inconsistent.

Refers to successful,

teaching practice that is

consistently high level. Most

experienced teachers

frequently demonstrates practice at this

level.

Refers to professional teaching that

innovatively involves students in the

learning process and creates a community of learners. Teachers

performing at this level are master

teachers and leaders in the field, both

inside and outside of their school.

Key

Indicators

Little or None

Unclear

Not Aligned

Some

Inconsistent

Partial

Most

Consistent

Clear

All

Complex

Leadership


TEACHER- STUDENT- DIRECTED SUCCESS DIRECTED SUCCESS


Professional Practice Critical Attributes

In addition to the Critical Attributes for the CPS Framework for Teaching, CPS and CTU worked together

to develop an additional resource to help describe teaching at each level of performance for teachers

of Diverse Learners. The SPED Critical Attributes are available on the Knowledge Center.

Critical Attributes represent descriptions of what one might see in a classroom. They are not

exhaustive and should not be used as checklists to justify ratings. When determining a level of

performance, the evaluator must use the language of the Framework.

Domain 1: Planning and Preparation

Component Unsatisfactory Basic Proficient Distinguished

1a: Demonstrating Knowledge of Content and Pedagogy

Knowledge of:

Content Standards Within and Across Grade Levels

Disciplinary Literacy

Prerequisite Relationships

Content-Related Pedagogy

Teacher demonstrates little to no knowledge of relevant content standards within and/or across grade levels. Teacher demonstrates no knowledge of the disciplinary way of reading, writing and/or thinking within the subject area. Teacher demonstrates little understanding of prerequisite knowledge important to student learning of the content/skills. Teacher’s plans reflect little or no understanding of the range of pedagogical approaches suitable to student learning of the content/skills being taught.

Teacher demonstrates knowledge of the relevant content standards within the grade level but displays lack of awareness of how these concepts r e l a t e to one another and/or build across grade levels. Teacher demonstrates some knowledge of the disciplinary way of reading, writing, and/or thinking within the subject area. The teacher demonstrates some understanding of prerequisite learning, although knowledge of relationships among topics may be inaccurate or incomplete. Teacher’s plans reflect a limited range of pedagogical approaches suitable to student learning of the content/skills being taught.

Teacher demonstrates knowledge of the relevant content standards, within and across grade levels. Teacher demonstrates knowledge of the disciplinary way of reading, writing, and/or thinking within the subject area. Teacher demonstrates accurate understanding of prerequisite learning and relationships among topics and concepts. Teacher’s plans reflect a range of effective pedagogical approaches suitable to student learning of the content/skills being taught.

Teacher demonstrates knowledge of the relevant content standards within the grade level and across grade levels, as well as how these standards relate to other disciplines. Teacher’s plans demonstrate extensive knowledge of the disciplinary way of reading, writing, and/or thinking within the subject area. Teacher demonstrates deep understanding of prerequisite learning and relationships among topics and concepts. Teacher’s plans include a range of effective pedagogical approaches suitable to student l e a r n i n g of the content/skills being taught and anticipate student misconceptions.

Critical Attributes

1. Unit and/or lesson plans do not include content standards.

2. Unit and/or lesson plans do not include strategies that require reading, writing or thinking in the content area.

3. Unit and/or lesson plans include content that is not sequenced based on prior lessons or prior student knowledge.

4. Unit and/or lesson plans include instructional strategies that are not appropriate for the content or students’ learning styles.

1. Unit and/or lesson plans include content standards but they may not be entirely appropriate for the grade level or properly sequenced.

2. Unit and/or lesson plans include some strategies that require reading, writing or thinking in the content area but they may not be fully described or appropriately selected.

3. Unit and/or lesson plans include some gaps in appropriate content or the sequence of content does not fully build on prior lessons or student knowledge.

4. Unit and/or lesson plans include a limited range of instructional strategies that are somewhat appropriate for the content and students’ learning styles.

1. Unit and/or lesson plans include content standards that are grade level appropriate and are properly sequenced.

2. Unit and/or lesson plans include appropriate and articulated strategies requiring reading, writing or thinking in the content area.

3. Unit and/or lesson plans include content that is well sequenced and builds on prior lessons and student knowledge.

4. Unit and/or lesson plans include a diverse range of instructional strategies that are entirely appropriate for the content and students’ learning styles.

In addition to the characteristics of

“proficient,”

1. Unit and/or lesson plans include connections to content standards from related disciplines.

2. Unit and/or lesson plans include strategies that connect reading, writing or thinking within the content area or to related disciplines.

3. Unit and/or lesson plans include strategies to clarify connections between major concepts in the content.

4. Unit and/or lesson plans include instructional strategies to anticipate student questions and student interest.


https://sites.google.com/a/cps.edu/kc/curriculum/instruction/cps-framework-for-teaching-with-critical-attributes

https://sites.google.com/a/cps.edu/kc/diverse-learners/2016%20SPED%20Critical%20Attributes.pdf?attredirects=0&d=1



Professional Practice Critical Attributes

Critical Attributes exist for the following CPS Frameworks: Teaching,

Psychology, School Social Work, School Nursing, and Speech- Language

Pathology. Practitioners are encouraged to print, read, and annotate relevant

Critical Attributes. Practitioners may want to reference these materials during

Pre- and Post-Observation Conferences.

Special Education Critical Attributes

In addition to the Special Education Addendum, CPS and CTU worked together to develop an additional

resource to help describe teaching at each level of performance for teachers of Diverse Learners. The SPED

Critical Attributes are available on the Knowledge Center.

The CPS Frameworks should guide professional growth and are used by

administrators and educators during observations to determine current levels of

performance and promote reflection on practice.

In using the Framework to evaluate educator practice, evaluators should consider

the preponderance of the evidence. Evaluators should not expect to see

everything described in each component of the Framework in every observation or

conference.





https://sites.google.com/a/cps.edu/kc/curriculum/cps-framework-for-non-classroom-teachers/social-work

https://sites.google.com/a/cps.edu/kc/curriculum/cps-framework-for-non-classroom-teachers/school-nurses






Professional Practice Evaluation Plan

Determining Your Evaluation Plan Evaluation Plan: The specific timing and type of observations are determined by the assigned Evaluation Plan. Every CPS educator is on an Annual Plan or a Biennial Plan.

Are you a Probationary Appointed Teacher (PAT)?

Are you a Probationary Appointed Teacher hired prior to July 1, 2013? Are you a Probationary Appointed Teacher hired after July 1, 2013? Additional guidance found on page 62.

Are you a Tenured Educator?

The Evaluation Plan for tenured educators is determined by their previous summative REACH Students

Rating. Some tenured educators are assigned to an ANNUAL PLAN, while some are assigned to a

BIENNIAL PLAN.

Annual Plan Biennial Plan

A previous summative REACH Students

Rating of Developing

Four observations within a single school year

Two Formal Observations and two Informal Observations

Observations are separated by at least one calendar month

Summative rating issued in September 2017

A previous summative REACH Students Rating of

Proficient/Excellent

Four observations across two school years

One Formal and one Informal

Observation each year

Observations are separated by at least three calendar months

Summative rating issued in September 2017-Year 2

Summative rating issued in September 2018-Year 1

*Tenured educators with an Unsatisfactory rating are placed on a Remediation Plan. Please reference the Remediation/ PDP page 63 for more information. © 2016, Chicago Public Schools. All Rights Reserved.

Four observations within a single school year

Three formal observations and one Informal Observation

Observations are separated by at least one calendar month

Summative rating issued in September 2017

All PAT educators are assigned to an ANNUAL PLAN.


Professional Practice Formal Observations

There are two types of observations. The first is a Formal Observation, which includes a Pre-

Observation Conference (focused on Domain 1), a classroom observation (Domains 2 and 3) and a

Post-Observation Conference (Component 4a and reflection on the observation). Each part of the

Formal Observation is summarized in the table below. The examples below are written for the CPS

Framework for Teaching. Reasonable accommodations may be made for those evaluated under other

Frameworks. Details about each step follow.


Formal Observation

PRE-OBSERVATION CONFERENCE FORMAL OBSERVATION

POST-OBSERVATION CONFERENCE

WHEN

Evaluator provides 48 hours (two school days) notice to educator.

The observation occurs within 5 school days of the Pre-Conference. The day and time is at evaluator’s discretion as long as it occurs during the lesson/unit discussed in the Pre-conference.

Occurs within 10 school days of the observation. Best Practice: Post-observation conference occurs at least one day following the observation.

WHAT

Educator and Evaluator engage in collaborative conversation intended to illuminate classroom context. Educator and evaluator reference Pre-Observation Protocol, and appropriate CPS Framework. Best Practice: Relevant Addendum is referenced.

Observed lesson must be from the unit discussed in the Pre-Observation conference. Evaluator observes and captures evidence in Domain 2 (Classroom Environment) and Domain 3 (Instruction) for the length of the lesson, 45 minutes, or a class period. Evaluator should reschedule observations if classroom activity is disrupted at the time of the scheduled observation.

Educator and Evaluator engage in collaborative conversation about evidence, preliminary ratings, feedback and next steps for improving practice. Focus on Domains 2 and 3 as well as Component 4a. Educator and evaluator reference Post-Observation Protocol, Framework language, evidence from observation. Best Practice: Relevant Addendum is referenced Best Practice: At least once per year, discuss 4b-4e evidence and scores.

HOW

Best Practice: Educator explains planning process in the Pre-Observation Protocol. Educator uploads unit and/or lesson plan in RLS prior to Pre-Conference.

Best Practice: Evaluator shares evidence in RLS prior to Post-Observation Conference.

Best Practice: Educator reviews evidence against Framework.

Best Practice: Educator completes Post-Observation Protocol in RLS prior to Post-Conference. Best Practice: Evaluator shares final ratings in RLS within 5 days of Post-Observation Conference.






Pre-Observation Conference

The Pre-Observation Conference is a meeting between the evaluator and educator held five or fewer

days prior to the observation. Evaluators must provide “reasonable notification” of the Pre-

Observation Conference to the educator. As a rule of thumb, “reasonable notification” should be

considered 48 hours in advance of the Pre-Observation Conference excluding weekends and holidays.

Prior to the conference, educators should review the questions on the Protocol for the Pre-Observation

Conference and be prepared to discuss their practice aligned to Domain 1. Educators have the option to

submit their responses and upload artifacts to the Reflect and Learn System (RLS) to support the unit

discussed in the collaborative conversation. Examples of artifacts may include unit plans, lesson plans,

student assessments, etc. Evidence from the conversation is documented in RLS.

During the Pre-Observation Conference the evaluators and educators clearly communicate about the

lesson/unit plan, objectives, instructional design and assessments as well as the students/grade for

whom the unit is designed.

Classroom Observation

Within five school days of the Pre-Observation Conference, evaluators conduct a formal classroom

observation for 45 minutes, the length of a lesson, or class period to collect evidence of the educator’s

practice aligned to each of the components in Domain 2 and Domain 3. The evaluator has discretion on

what day and time they choose to observe an educator as long as it is within five schools days of the Pre-

Observation Conference and the educator is teaching the lesson or unit that was discussed.

Following the observation, the evaluator aligns evidence to the components of the Framework and

may determine preliminary performance ratings. In order to best support teachers’ reflection and

ensure a productive, evidence-based post-conference conversation, evaluators should share evidence

from the observation with the teacher in advance of the Post-Observation Conference.

Audio and/or video recordings can be used during REACH Students observations only in cases where

there is mutual consent (both educator and evaluator). Recordings can only be used for professional

development purposes and require mutual consent. Recordings cannot be submitted as evidence for

any part of the evaluation by the educator or evaluator.






Post-Observation Conference

Within 10 school days of the classroom observation, the evaluator and the educator meet for a Post-

Observation Conference to discuss and reflect on evidence of the educator’s practice. To prepare for the

conference, educators may wish to respond to the questions on the Protocol for the Post-Observation in

RLS.

Educators are not required to submit responses to the Protocol for the Post-Observation Conference, but

should be prepared to discuss the questions. To facilitate reflection, evaluators are encouraged to share

evidence collected during the observation with educators prior to the Post-Observation Conference.

Teachers have the option of bringing additional evidence to the conference, for example, student work

generated during the observation or student work from follow-up homework. During the Post-

Observation Conference, evaluators will collect evidence for Component 4a: Reflecting on Teaching

and Learning, clarify evidence collected for Domains 2 and 3 and may discuss evidence for

Components 4b–4e. Evaluators and educators will discuss components/elements of Celebration

(areas of strength) and Concentration (areas for improvement) as well as next steps and resources.

Following the Post-Observation Conference, evaluators finalize ratings for all components in Domains

1, 2, 3, and Component 4a and share these ratings with the educator. It is best practice that the

ratings be posted and shared on the Reflect and Learn System within five school days of the Post-

Observation Conference.

NOTE: The evaluator should determine final component-level ratings based on the preponderance of

evidence collected during the observation of professional practice and the Post-Observation

Conference.

Before the Post-Observation Conference

Evaluators share evidence from the observation via RLS in advance of the

Post-Observation Conference.

Educators answer the Protocol for the Post-Observation Conference

questions on RLS.



https://sites.google.com/a/cps.edu/kc/reach-students/teacher-practice/SY%2014-15%20Pre%20Conference%20Form%208.8.14.doc?attredirects=0&d=1

https://sites.google.com/a/cps.edu/kc/reach-students/teacher-practice/SY%2014-15%20Pre%20Conference%20Form%208.8.14.doc?attredirects=0&d=1




During the Post-Observation Conference

Discuss the written evidence from the observation. The goal is to have a

common understanding of what happened during the observation.

Educator shares what went well and what could have gone better during

the lesson.

Evaluator shares what went well and what could have gone better

during the lesson.

Evaluator identifies areas for improvement with specific suggestions and support offered. The

evaluator targets feedback and coaching to areas of growth.

The evaluator and educator reference language from the appropriate Framework (including

Critical Attributes) when discussing evidence and ratings. If appropriate, a Framework Addedum

may also be referfenced by the educator or the evaluator.

Evaluator shares preliminary component-level ratings for discussion. Ratings are not finalized

until after the Post-Conference.

After the Post Conference

Evaluator shares final component-level ratings with the educator in RLS within five school days after the Post-Observation Conference.

Evaluator is required to rate all components of Domain 1, 2, 3, and Component 4a during a Formal Observation.




REACH Students observations will only be conducted by evaluators certified by the Illinois State

Board of Education (ISBE). In the event that the Principal and Assistant Principal in a building are

unable to conduct observations due to unexpected circumstances, CPS may appoint a certified

evaluator.

It is important to note that additional classroom visits by school colleagues,

network teams, school leadership teams and/or individuals (e.g., peer

observations, walkthroughs, snapshots) may still occur, but these classroom

visits are non-evaluative and do not count toward a teacher’s summative

REACH Students Rating. That is, only evidence gathered during a REACH

Students Formal or Informal Observation is used to inform a teacher’s

summative REACH Students Rating.

Any observation, REACH Students or otherwise, should be used as an opportunity to hold

additional collaborative conversations, develop teaching practice and support teachers in

achieving professional goals.

Share evidence and a draft of component-level ratings before the Post- Observation Conference.

REACH Students observations can begin at the start of the 5th week of

school, Monday, October 3, 2016. Pre-Observation Conferences can

commence prior to October 3, 2016 and must be held five or fewer school

days before the observation.

REACH Students observations must end on Friday, May 26, 2017.

Post-Observation Conferences can be held after May 26, 2017 and must take

place within 10 schools days of the classroom observation.



Professional Practice Informal Observations

Informal Observations are a minimum of 15 minutes and are unannounced. Please see below for a

table describing the protocol for an Informal Observation. Evaluators should make it clear to

educators whether or not an unannounced visit to the classroom is for REACH Students evaluative

purposes.

Administrators are encouraged to conduct non-evaluative visits in order to provide more frequent

feedback to educators. If it is a REACH Students Informal Observation, the evaluator should inform the

educator when evidence and ratings have been entered into RLS. It is best practice to share evidence

and final component-level ratings within five school days after the observation has been conducted.

Informal Observations are occasions for more targeted coaching. It is an opportunity

to focus on specific components, such as those discussed in a prior Post Observation

Conference, in order to improve practice.


OBSERVATION AFTER the OBSERVATION

WHEN

No advance notice is necessary. Educators or evaluators may request an in-person conference.

WHAT

Evaluator observes for at least 15 minutes and captures evidence from the classroom.

Evaluator should proactively communicate if an observation is for REACH purposes.

Focus is on Domain 2 (Classroom Environment) and Domain 3 (Instruction).

Evaluators are not required to rate all components, only components with sufficient evidence for Domains 2 and 3.

HOW

Evaluator enters evidence in Reflect and Learn System.

Evaluator shares evidence and ratings, provides feedback and finalizes the observation cycle in RLS.

Best Practice: Evaluator shares evidence and final component level ratings within 5 school days after the observation.



Professional Practice Professional Responsibilities

Components 4b-4e are not rated during a formal observation, but evaluators and educators are

encouraged to discuss them during a Post-Observation Conferences. Ratings are issued once per

evaluation cycle.

WHAT evidence should be entered into the Reflect and Learn System? Evidence for 4b–4e can be captured as a brief narrative that reflects the educator’s professional

practice throughout the school year. Educators receiving a summative rating at the end of SY 2016-17 are encouraged to enter evidence

by mid-February in order to receive feedback. Up to two artifacts, per component, that showcase best practices can also be submitted, but

a thoughtful description may take the place of uploading documents into RLS.

WHAT happens after evidence has been entered into the Reflect and Learn System?

Evaluators are encouraged to review the evidence and provide feedback by the end of spring break. Educators make final edits to the evidence by mid-May. Evaluators review final evidence in June and issue final ratings.

WHO will receive a rating at the end of SY 2016–2017?

PATs Tenured Educators on an Annual Plan Tenured or Part-time Educators completing Year 2 of a Biennial Plan

Quality of evidence is more important than quantity of evidence. Re-read the

language of the Framework to inform the writing of a narrative description of

practice. Educators should only upload evidence that explicitly helps an evaluator

assess the proper level of performance.

Educators are encouraged to reach out to their evaluators to discuss evidence

and ratings during the Post-Observation Conference.

If an educator on a Biennial Plan submits evidence for Components 4b–4e in year

one of their two year cycle, the evaluator should consider that evidence as well as

any evidence they document in year two when issuing final ratings.

Note: If scores are entered in 4b-4e during Year 1 of a Biennial’s cycle, those scores

will not count toward the rating. Only scores entered in Year 2 are used in summative calculations. © 2016, Chicago Public Schools. All Rights Reserved.




Professional Practice Professional Responsibilities

Attendance

Attendance is one of five elements of Component 4e: Demonstrating Professionalism. Evaluators must

always consider the preponderance of evidence across the entire component when issuing ratings.

It is not appropriate for an evaluator to assign more weight to Attendance than Integrity and Ethical

Conduct, Advocacy, Decision-Making, or Compliance with School and District Regulations. An

evaluator may not create local school criteria regarding attendance and apply them as part of the

REACH Students evaluation process.

Educators are encouraged to be mindful of the importance of punctuality and regular attendance, but

should not be deterred from appropriately using contractual benefit time. Educators must follow their

school’s absence monitoring procedures (reporting, substitute plans, etc.) when taking a benefit day.

It is considered misconduct if an educator abuses sick or personal business benefit days, or uses

absences to avoid the REACH process. Examples of conduct that may merit disciplinary action include

but are not limited to:

repeated tardiness

repeated unplanned absences with short notice

short notice of planned absences

planned or unplanned absences on key dates for the school (report card pick-up, PD days, testing

days, special event days)

repeated Friday/Monday, day before holiday/break absences

excessive numbers of days off without a leave of absence

use of sick days for other than personal illness

.



Professional Practice Reflect and Learn System

The Reflect and Learn System (RLS) facilitates professional dialogue and meaningful feedback between

CPS educators and evaluators to help us all better serve the needs of Chicago’s students. Through the

evaluation cycle, evaluators use RLS to collect evidence, align evidence to components and enter

component-level ratings. Educators may use RLS to upload relevant documentation for observation

cycles and professional responsibility components as well as view REACH Students Evaluation Summary

Reports and observation cycle evidence and ratings. During the school year, educators interact with RLS

to:

Access REACH Students Evaluation Summary Report

Educators can always access REACH Students Evaluation Summary Reports that have been issued

on the RLS homepage.

Review Evaluator Evidence

Educators can view evaluator evidence for each scored component after the evaluator has entered

and shared these items in RLS.

Review Component-Level Ratings after a Post-Observation Conference

Educators can review evidence that an evaluator as entered and shared in RLS.

Upload Documents as Evidence

Educators are encouraged to complete and upload relevant materials into RLS to support their

evaluation cycles. Relevant items may include Protocol(s) for Pre- and Post-Observation Conference

question sets. Excessive uploading of documents is discouraged.

Log into the Reflect and Learn System by going to https://reflectandlearn.cps.edu/ Use your CPS

Username and Password to gain access.





Professional Practice FAQs

1. Q: Why didn’t I get ratings for all of the components after an Informal Observation? A: Unlike Formal Observations, Informal Observations do not require an evaluator to give ratings for all Domain 2 and 3 Components. Because Informal Observations are shorter in length, evaluators need only score Components that are relevant to what was seen during the observation.

2. Q: Can more than one evaluator be present during a REACH observation? A: Yes. In cases where more than one evaluator is present, one evaluator is responsible for entering evidence and determining ratings as well as conducting the Pre and Post Observation Conferences.

3. Q: Can I request an evaluator to re-do a REACH observation? A: Yes, but it is at the discretion of the evaluator whether or not to provide an additional observation. If the request is granted, the prior observation data will not be deleted from the Reflect and Learn System.

4. Q: I changed to a new CPS school this year. Can my new principal see my previous REACH data? A: Yes, previous REACH data can be accessed by CPS evaluators at the educator’s current school.

5. Q: What happens with observation ratings for educators who are hired in the middle of the year? A: In the event of a mid-year transfer, educators should expect to receive all required observations according to their Evaluation Plan. Observations from both schools’ evaluators will be used toward the teacher’s summative rating. If the educator is a new, mid-year hire, the evaluator is responsible for ensuring that the appropriate number of observations takes place depending on the Evaluation plan of the educator.

6. Q: Is an evaluator allowed to do more than the required number of Formal/Informal Observations? A: Yes, If an evaluator has the opportunity to provide more feedback by conducting additional observations while adhering to specified time span, the highest Formal and highest Informal Observations will be used toward the teacher’s summative rating in accordance with their plan. An evaluator can also substitute a Formal Observation for an Informal Observation.

7. Q: Some CPS teachers spend part of their time supervising student in settings where the teacher is not actively instructing. For example, students may be taking a test or completing activities as part of a computer-based curriculum, such as Achieve 3000. Should REACH observations happen when teachers are supervising students in these settings? A: No, it is generally unacceptable to observe for REACH purposes when the teacher is engaged in supervisory duties. REACH observations should take place when a teacher is actively instructing his/her students. It is appropriate for administrators to ask during a pre-conference how an online curriculum is used to inform planning of units or lessons.




8. Q: Is it acceptable for a teacher to be observed if her co-teacher is absent on the day the evaluator has designated for a Formal Observation? A: No, it is generally unacceptable. Observing the teacher while working with a day-to-day substitute is not the intention of the REACH process. It is best practice for a teacher to be observed under normal circumstances when required regular staff are present. Every effort should be made to schedule the observation for a date and time reflecting regular instruction.

9. Q: How should the Heggerty curriculum be considered during REACH observations? A: Heggerty is a phonemic awareness curriculum intended to be completed with a whole class of elementary students. Each lesson lasts about 15 minutes.

Evaluators are permitted to collect evidence while a teacher is using the Heggerty curriculum. The teacher’s execution of the content, in conjunction with other content under study, can be considered when evaluating the teacher’s instructional practice based on thorough discussion of how Heggerty is used in the classroom during pre and post observation conferences. If Heggerty is used during a REACH informal observation, which can be as short as 15 minutes, a post-observation conference to discuss the lesson is recommended.

It is best practice to view Heggerty as one tool in a teacher’s instructional tool kit. Evaluators are encouraged to include evidence beyond the Heggerty portion of a lesson when issuing REACH ratings.

10 Q: What are the best practices for conducting REACH observations for a CPS teacher who is mentoring another teacher? A: Under no circumstances should the evaluator observe the student teacher and use evidence from that observation to constitute any part of a teacher of record's evaluation. The mentor teacher should communicate the student teacher’s schedule to the school administration as soon as possible to inform the scheduling of REACH observations. The evaluator should schedule observations of the mentor teacher outside of the student teacher’s assignment.

If necessary, modifications to the student teacher’s schedule should be made so that the required observations can occur.

11 Q: What if an educator does not submit evidence for Domain 1 or Domain 4, Components 4b-4e? Should the evaluator automatically issue a rating of Unsatisfactory?

A: No. If an educator does not provide evidence this does not automatically equate to Unsatisfactory practice.

If an educator does not complete the Pre or Post Observation Conference questions, the evaluator should summarize the evidence provided for each Domain 1 Component during the Pre or Post Observation Conference and rate accordingly.

If the educator does not provide narratives for Components 4b-4e, the administrator should type a short narrative for each component and rate accordingly.



12 Q: What if an educator seems to be avoiding the REACH process?

A: Communication is always the key and evaluators should first assess whether there was a misunderstanding with scheduling. Evaluators should contact Employee Engagement for all educators who willfully fail to participate in the REACH evaluation procedures. Behaviors that could warrant disciplinary action include: strategically absent or unavailable, refusal to participate in Pre- and/or Post-Observation Conferences, refusal to participate during Pre- and/or Post-Observation Conferences without a witness.


Student Growth

Student Growth Performance Tasks


A REACH Students Performance Task is a written or hands-on demonstration of mastery, or progress

towards mastery, of a selected standard(s) or skill(s). It asks students to perform or to generate

meaning on their own rather than select answers from a pre-determined list. REACH Students PTs can

yield rich insights not only into what students know and do not yet know, but how they apply their

knowledge to complex questions or tasks. This provides teachers with formative information they can

use to help students improve not just their content knowledge, but the facility with which they can

“put it all together.”

Performance Task Development

REACH Performance Tasks are developed by teams of CPS teachers. Over 250 CPS teachers with

expertise across PK–12 in 12 different content areas create the collection of REACH Students

Performance Tasks administered across the District each year. The teams select a foundational

standard in the content area/grade level that is measurable within one class period. They then design,

pilot, and refine a beginning and end of year test form. During the process, over 20 central office

content specialists and members of the Department of Student Assessment provide training, guidance,

and support.

Task Administration

ALL classroom educators evaluated using the CPS Framework for Teaching or CPS Framework for

Teacher-Librarians must administer a REACH Students Performance Task to one of his/her classrooms.

REACH Performance Tasks will be administered at the beginning and the end of the 2016-17 school

year to the same group of students.

Administration Windows (SY 15–16) Dates

Beginning of Year (BOY) September 19, 2016 – October 28, 2016

End of Year (EOY) May 8, 2017 – June 9, 2017








Task Ordering

Teachers can obtain their REACH Students Performance Tasks in two ways:

1) Teachers can place an order for their tasks through the Google Form provided by the Department of Student Assessment, and the relevant materials will be delivered to schools by September 25th. The dates for ordering Fall BOY assessments are August 29– September 2, 2016. The dates for ordering Spring EOY assessments are March 20- March 31, 2017.

2) Teachers can download the task documents from the REACH PT page of the Knowledge Center and print the necessary materials independently.

Almost every teacher in CPS should be able to select a REACH Performance Task that is applicable and

appropriate for one of his/her classrooms. We expect very few teachers to have to create their own

REACH PTs. For a list of available tasks, visit the REACH PT page of the Knowledge Center. For those

who do need to create their own REACH PT, please follow the guidelines provided in the REACH PT

Manual.

Score Entry

Teachers enter their students’ REACH PT scores into the CIM system. Scoring guides can be

downloaded on the REACH PT page of the Knowledge Center. This year, teachers will be asked to enter

both the total points and summative scores (0, 1, 2, or 3) into CIM for each student’s test. All scores

must be entered into CIM before the administration window ends.

Growth Calculation

The beginning of year (BOY) assessment and end of year (EOY) assessment are designed to measure

the same standard at the same level of difficulty. The percentage of students who make growth from

the BOY to EOY will be factored into a teacher’s summative REACH Students Rating as one of the

multiple measures of student growth. For REACH PTs, “growth” is defined as moving up at least one

performance level on the summative scale from BOY to EOY (e.g., 0 1, 13, etc.). If a student

begins at the highest level (3) at the BOY and retains that score at the EOY, then that is also counted as

“growth” for purposes of REACH.


https://sites.google.com/a/cps.edu/kc/assessment/reach-performance-tasks?pli=1

https://sites.google.com/a/cps.edu/kc/assessment/reach-performance-tasks


http://kc.cps.edu/


http://kc.cps.edu/



A teacher’s Performance Task score is based on the percentage of students that grow, not the magnitude of growth. Examples below illustrate whether or not an individual student has grown:

BOY Score

EOY Score

Counts as Growth?

Explanation

3 3 Yes Because the student has already topped out the scale in

BOY, a 3–3 score counts as growth.

1 3 Yes This student grew, though the amount of growth does not

affect the score.

2 2 No If a student receives the same non-3 score in BOY and EOY,

no growth.

2 1 No If the EOY score is less than the BOY, no growth.

Performance Task Roster Verification

Performance Task Roster Verification is a process in the Battelle for Kids system that allows teachers to confirm which students for which task(s) should count for the teachers’ REACH Performance Task growth scores. The REACH Performance Task(s) administered and the roster of the students who took the test are reviewed and edited to affirm which students’ results will impact a teacher’s evaluation. All teachers must complete PT Verification so that the correct students can be counted for a teacher’s REACH Performance Task Growth Score.

If you have any questions, please first consult the REACH PT Handbook, downloadable at the REACH PT

page of the Knowledge Center. If you are unable to determine the correct course of action, please

email [email protected] with your query.





http://kc.cps.edu/

mailto:[email protected]


Student Growth Value-Added Measures

What are Value-Added Measures (VAMs)?

A nationally-recognized statistical model that measures the impact of a school and/or a teacher on

students’ academic growth from year to year.

The Value-Added Model compares students with similar characteristics to 1) see how similar

students grew relative to each other, and 2) to capture the teacher’s contribution to student

learning, adjusting for factors outside of the teacher’s control.

To measure the teacher’s contribution to student growth, the Value-Added Model “controls” or

adjusts for prior performance and

other student factors that also

influence academic growth, but are

outside the teacher’s control.

How was CPS’s Value Added Model

developed?

The CPS Value-Added Model was

developed by the Value-Added

Research Center, at the University of

Wisconsin-Madison.

The VAM Technical Advisory

Committee (TAC), established in

2007, provides input into the model

and includes local and national

experts.



Student Growth Value-Added Measures

How is a teacher’s Value-Added score determined?

A teacher’s Value-Added result is the

difference between actual student

performance and predicted student

performance in either Math or

Reading using:

Spring NWEA Measures of

Academic Progress (MAP) for

Elementary Schools

Instructional responsibility as determined through Roster Verification

A set of student characteristics

that are outside of a teacher’s

control

Which outside factors are controlled for when calculating a VAM score?

Value-Added Model allows CPS to “control” or adjust for factors that influence student performance

but are outside of the teacher’s control. The following is a list of factors controlled for in CPS Value-

Added Model:

1. Prior reading assessment data 6. Grade level 2. Prior math assessment data 7. Gender 3. Race/ethnicity 8. Low-income status 4. English Language Learner status 9. Individualized Education Program status 5. Students in temporary living situations 10. Mobility


Student Growth Classroom Roster Verification and Performance Task Roster Verification


Roster Verification

Roster Verification is a process administered through Battelle for Kids (BFK) Link software and is used

to accurately capture the instructional associations between teachers and their students. A record of

rosters of both classroom schedules, as recorded in IMPACT, and Performance Task administrations, as

recorded in BOY score entry, are made available for review and modification through BFK-Link. CPS

uses these rosters to calculate teacher-level measures of their students’ academic growth as a part of

REACH Students evaluation system. Because teachers and principals know best the schedules and

amount of instructional responsibility for each student, their active participation will ensure the best,

most accurate possible data results from the roster verification process. The accuracy of this process

is particularly important for teachers who share students (SPED and other), who transfer, or are hired

midyear.

The Roster Verification process begins in Spring 2017.

Classroom Roster Verification

Performance Task Roster

Verification (PT Verification)

Educators Verify

which students they taught for

each course,

for what months in the school

year, and

whether they provided all of the

instruction or collaborated with

another teacher.

which students they expect to

receive credit for in their

Performance Task student

growth measure

Educator

Responsibilities

Teachers will be responsible for

reviewing, editing, and confirming

the accuracy of their class roster(s)

by indicating when their students

were members of the class and the

level of instructional responsibility

for each student. Principals then

approve the teacher-verified

rosters.

Teachers will be responsible for

reviewing, editing, and confirming

the accuracy of their Performance

Task roster(s) by indicating the

students who are expected to have

both a BOY (or MOY) and EOY score.

Principals then approve the

teacher-verified rosters.


Student Growth Classroom Roster Verification and Performance Task Roster Verification


Classroom and Performance Task Roster Verification Training and Login Spring 2017

Access the online system by going to the Battelle for Kids site and clicking “Access Link” which will

take you to the BFK•Link® login screen. Use your CPS user name and password to login to the

system.

Review the column on the right-hand side of the Link page to see your timeline, school support

team, and available resources.

For questions, contact your school-based Roster Verification support team.

For dates, principal training times, and access to both administrator and educator resources, see the Knowledge Center Roster Verification page, under REACH.


http://portal.battelleforkids.org/chicago

https://sites.google.com/a/cps.edu/kc/reach-students/roster-verification


Student Growth FAQs

1. Q: How is the Student Growth score calculated for PreK – Grade 2 educators? A: The Student Growth score for PreK –Grade 2 and high school educators will be comprised

entirely of Performance Task results. Teachers and librarians in these grades will enter scores for

two REACH PTs or two classes. Consult the REACH Performance Task Manual for more

information.

2. Q: How are two Performance Task scores calculated for a final rating?

A: Results from both Performance Tasks will be aggregated. Educators will receive a single Performance Task score based on results from the two REACH PTs given or the PT given to two classes.

3. Q: Which students count towards my REACH Performance Task Score? A: A student will count towards and educator’s REACH Performance Task score if the:

Student has BOY scores entered in CIM during an approved administration window.

Student has EOY scores entered in CIM for the corresponding task code during the approved

administration window.

Teacher verifies the student for the administered task through the Performance Task Roster

Verification process in the Battelle for Kids system. The principal approves the verification.

4. Q: Does the magnitude of growth impact the Performance Task Score?

A: No. For the purposes of the REACH Performance Task score, there is no difference between

moving from a 0 to a 3 and moving from a 1 to a 2.

5. Q: What is the difference between Classroom Roster Verification and Performance Task Roster

Verification? Are they the same?

A: Classroom Roster Verification and Performance Task Roster Verification both occur within the

Battelle for Kids system and are completed at the same time, but they are not the same. The

information collected in Performance Task Roster Verification and Classroom Roster Verification

are used for different purposes.

Classroom Roster Verification is a process for accurately and transparently capturing the

instructional attribution between teachers and students. This allows for CPS to continuously

improve data quality and accurately associate students with their teachers during Value-Added

calculations.

As part of the Roster Verification process, CPS has integrated a Performance Task roster

verification to ensure the accurate attribution of Performance Task scores in our REACH Students

Summative Rating calculations. In this process, teachers confirm which students for which task(s)

should be counted towards this score.

Student Growth FAQs


6. Q: What happens in cases where the educator did not complete the Performance Task

Verification process or was not able to administer the BOY / EOY Performance Task?

A: For educators who did not satisfy the above three conditions, one of the following outcomes

will occur:

For teachers who must administer only one Performance Task:

o The REACH PT percentage of the evaluation is reallocated to the Value-Added metric

(i.e. 70% Professional Practice, 30% VAM).

If a VAM score is not available, the REACH PT percentage is reallocated to

Professional Practice (i.e. 100% Professional Practice).

For teachers who must administer two Performance Tasks (i.e. K-2, High School):

o If the teacher does not have scores for two Performance Tasks, the percentage for

both Performance Tasks is reallocated to Professional Practice (i.e. 100% Professional

Practice).


Evaluation Summary

Report


Overview


The REACH Students Evaluation Summary Report provides details about the measures used to calculate an educator’s REACH Students Summative Rating.

Educators who were observed during the 2015-156 school year will receive REACH Students Summary Reports. This includes classroom educators, teacher-librarians, educational support specialists, related service providers and counselors.

There are different kinds of REACH Students Evaluation Summary Reports: Final,

Interim and Informational.

The final REACH Students Evaluation Summary Report contains final calculations for each of the

multiple measures accounted for in an educator's REACH Students Evaluation Plan. This may include

the final Professional Practice Score, Value-Added Score and Performance Task

Score. The REACH Students Evaluation Summary Report displays the educator's summative REACH

Students Rating of Distinguished, Proficient, Developing or Unsatisfactory. Educators on an annual plan

or the second year of their biennial plan will receive this summary report.

An interim REACH Students Evaluation Summary Report includes observation and student growth data that will count towards a summative REACH Students Rating. This report does not include REACH Students Total Points or summative REACH Students Ratings. Educators who have completed year one of a Biennial Plan will receive an interim report.

An informational REACH Students Evaluation Summary Report includes observation and student growth data that will not count towards a summative REACH Students Rating. This report does not include REACH Students Total Points or summative REACH Students Ratings. Educators who are receiving an inability to rate or no rating will receive this report.

All educators can access their REACH Students Evaluation Summary Reports in the Reflect and Learn System (RLS). To access your report:

1. Log into the Reflect and Learn System using your CPS username and password. 2. On your RLS homepage, scroll down, locate and click the button that reads “My REACH Results”. 3. Click the tab that reads “2015-16” and locate the link that reads “2015-16 REACH Evaluation

Summary Report”.



Summative REACH Students Rating

Evaluation Summary Report Sums

The summative REACH Students Rating is developed from Professional Practice Scores and measures

of Student Growth, when applicable. Scores from each measure (i.e., Professional Practice,

Performance Tasks, Value-Added) are converted to a scale of 1.00–4.00 and contributes to the Total

Points. Each scaled score is multiplied by the appropriate weight which yields a weighted total for

each measure (Total Points). Summative REACH Students Ratings are based on the Total Points of

each measure which are added together to equal the REACH Students Total Points, which falls on a

scale between 100 and 400 points. Your final totals for each measure are then added and assigned a

summative REACH Students Rating. An overview of this calculation is provided in the image below.



Clarifying Terminology



Clarifying Terminology

Performance levels for educator practice (i.e., evidence gathered during classroom observations) are

based on the CPS Framework for Teaching (or discipline specific Framework); these are different than

the overall summative REACH Students Rating categories.

Summative REACH Students Rating categories are determined by PERA. ISBE calls the rating below

Proficient “Needs Improvement.” CPS and CTU agreed this will be referred to as Developing.

Previous Summative Rating categories are listed as a point of reference. Also, these rating categories

were used to determine the initial Evaluation Plan in SY 2012-13 for tenured educators.

Find additional up-to-date information, resources and FAQs refer to the REACH Summary Data and Reports page on the Knowledge Center.


Levels of Performance in CPS Framework for Teaching

(Classroom Observations)

REACH Students Rating Categories

(Summative REACH Students Ratings ONLY)

SY11—12 / Previous Rating Categories

(Summative REACH Students Ratings)

Distinguished Excellent Superior

Proficient Proficient Excellent

Basic Developing Satisfactory

Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory

CPS Framework Performance Levels

Used ONLY for professional practice, specific to the CPS

Framework for Teaching and other discipline-specified

Frameworks.

Summative REACH Students Ratings

Used ONLY at the end of an evaluation cycle when a final

summative evaluation rating is provided. Includes both teacher practice and growth measures.

Previous Summative REACH Student Ratings

Point of reference. Previous ratings were used to determine

when tenured educators first receive a Summative REACH

Students Rating.


https://sites.google.com/a/cps.edu/kc/reach-students/reach-summary-data-and-reports



Counselor Practice

Counselor Practice CPS Framework for School Counselors


Overview

Similar to the CPS Framework for Teaching, CPS has created a Framework for School Counselors. The

Framework for School Counselors is organized into four domains of school counseling:

Domain 1: Planning and Preparation Domain 2: The Environment Domain 3: Delivery of Services Domain 4: Professional Responsibilities

The School Counselor summative REACH Students Rating is based 100% on the Professional Practice

score. The following is the breakdown of weights for each domain:

It may not be possible to observe every element of each component in the CPS Framework for School Counselors. Evaluators should use pre and post observation conferences to gather evidence regarding practice and delivery of services observed. © 2016, Chicago Public Schools. All Rights Reserved.





Refer to the CPS Framework for School Counselors Companion Guide for details about gathering evidence for components, including recommendations for discussion during the pre- and post-observation conferences.

REACH Students Guidance for Observing School Counselors

At the start of each school year, evaluators and School Counselors are encouraged to meet to discuss

counseling program goals, resources and expectations, especially through completion of the Annual

Agreement. In some cases, elementary School Counselors, nominated as case managers, should meet

with their evaluators to complete the Framework Selection Form for Case Managers.

Annual Agreement

The Annual Agreement is a tool provided by the Office of School Counseling and Postsecondary

Advising that can be used to address the roles and responsibilities of the School Counselor as well as

how the School Counseling Program will be organized to meet goals.

School Counselors and evaluators are encouraged to complete the Annual Agreement meeting early in

the year to discuss time distribution, school counseling program needs and goals.

Framework Selection

During the development of the Annual Agreement, the School Counselor who has been nominated as

the case manager and the evaluator will determine which framework best fits the School Counselor’s

roles and responsibilities – the CPS Framework for School Counselors, which is adaptable to include

case management duties, or the CPS Framework for Educational Support Specialists (ESS). Please note

the Office of School Counseling and Postsecondary Advising recommend the use of the CPS Framework

for School Counselors.

If the ESS Framework is deemed the best fit for the School Counselor, then the Framework Selection

Form for Case Managers must be completed..

Evidence Based Implementation Plan (EBIP)

The Evidence Based Implementation Plan (EBIP) is a tool provided by the Office of School Counseling and Postsecondary Advising that includes a calendar, action plan(s), lesson plan(s), etc. to ensure that a structured, intentional approach is in place to address the academic, career and personal/social development of all students. This can be an additional point of discussion in completing the Annual Agreement and/or uploaded as evidence during the REACH performance evaluation process.



https://sites.google.com/a/cps.edu/kc/reach-students/counselors-case-managers


https://sites.google.com/a/cps.edu/kc/home/office-of-college-and-career-success/school-counseling-and-post-secondary-advising/10-implementation-plan/Annual%20Agreement%20template_2014.2015.docx

https://sites.google.com/a/cps.edu/kc/home/office-of-college-and-career-success/school-counseling-and-post-secondary-advising/10-implementation-plan



Counselor Resources

The Evidence Based Implementation Plan, Annual Agreement and the Framework Selection Form for

Case Managers can be found on the Knowledge Center.

The CPS Framework for School Counselors Companion Guide is the source for appropriate artifacts to

upload as evidence and definitions and examples of practice within each domain and component. See

the Knowledge Center under the REACH tab and click Counselors & Case Managers.

Expected in Fall 2016, there will be a REACH Framework for School Counselors Database of Resources available on the Knowledge Center for School Counselors interested in accessing lesson plans and other documents, photos and videos of School Counselor practice. All resources will be categorized school counseling activity, grade level and REACH domain and component. Please see the Office of School Counseling and Postsecondary Advising Knowledge Center for resources. You may also access the Framework for School Counselors FAQ document for additional help.






http://kc.cps.edu/


http://kc.cps.edu/

https://sites.google.com/a/cps.edu/kc/home/office-of-college-and-career-success/school-counseling-and-post-secondary-advising


Counselor Practice FAQs


1. Q: If I am an elementary School Counselor but the majority of my work is case management,

which CPS Framework should I be on?

A: The Counselor and evaluator should meet early in the school year to discuss which Framework is

most appropriate using the Framework selection process mentioned on page 49. The evaluator

makes the final decision on which Framework will be used.

2. Q: What evidence can school administrators and/or evaluators collect for the School Counselor evaluation?

A: Some components of the CPS Framework for School Counselors are best demonstrated through

professional conversations (e.g. Domain 1 and Component 4a). Evidence for Domain 1: Planning

and Preparation, could include: implementation plan and/or school counseling program goals,

needs assessment, record of referrals, annual counseling calendar, school counseling core

curriculum action plan/lesson plans, small-group action plan/curriculum, pre/post-tests, flashlight

presentations, etc.

Skills described in Domain 2: The Environment, and Domain 3: Delivery of Service, are best seen

during school counseling activity observations. During this observation, the school administrator

will take notes to capture the evidence of school counselor practice, and perhaps speak with

students/audience to gauge their understanding. Capturing this evidence directly/electronically will

make the remaining steps of the process significantly more efficient, and it is strongly encouraged.

Examples of additional evidence include: daily schedules, phone logs, contact logs, annual

counseling calendar, systems for counseling duties, department meeting agendas, counselor

newsletter, pre/post-tests, individual learning plans, etc. Visit pages 8-17 of the Framework for

School Counselors Companion Guide for more recommendations.

3. Q: I am a School Counselor, and my evaluator is expressing difficulty finding appropriate evidence

to rate me in all components. Are there resources available to assist with the Counselor REACH

Students process?

A: Yes, the CPS Framework for School Counselors Companion Guide has a wealth of guidance

information to assist evaluators in observing and rating counselor practice, including

component definitions and examples, lists of artifacts, etc. See the Knowledge Center under

the REACH Tab and click Counselors & Case Managers.




http://kc.cps.edu/

.

Additional Frameworks:

Educational Support Specialists (ESS)

and Librarians

Additional Frameworks Educational Support Specialists (ESS)


Educational Support Specialist Framework

The CPS Framework for Educational Support Specialists (ESS) may be used for educators whose job

description does not always involve instructing groups of students while simultaneously not having a

job description that fits under the other CPS Frameworks for Non-Classroom Teachers. Examples of

educators who may opt to be evaluated under the Framework for ESS may include (not an exhaustive

list):

IB Coordinators

STEM Coordinators

Counselors who serve primarily as case managers

Instructional Coaches

Deans

Bilingual Leads

Similar to the CPS Framework for Teaching, the ESS Framework is divided into four domains, as follows:


Domain 2: The Environment - Building a Community of Learners

Domain 3: Delivery of Service and Support

Domain 4: Professional Responsibilities

2016, Chicago Public Schools. All Rights Reserved.

https://sites.google.com/a/cps.edu/kc/reach-students/educational-support-specialists-ess



Additional Frameworks Educational Support Specialists (ESS)


The domain weightings for the CPS Framework for Educational Support Specialists are the same as the

CPS Framework for Teaching, as noted in the chart below.

In order to be evaluated under the ESS Framework, the evaluator must submit a Framework Change

Request Form.

Educators evaluated using the ESS Framework will receive a final rating based solely on Professional

Practice; student growth metrics are not factored into summative REACH Students Ratings for these

educators.




Additional Frameworks Teacher-Librarians


Teacher-Librarians have a dedicated Framework adapted from the Danielson Framework for

Library/Media Specialist.

Similar to all other CPS Frameworks, the CPS Framework for Teacher-Librarians is divided into four

domains each of which is then further divided into related components. The Teacher-Librarian

domains are as follows:


Domain 2: The Environment

Domain 3: Delivery of Instruction and Services

Domain 4: Professional Responsibilities

The domain weightings for Teacher-Librarians are as follows:

Student Growth metrics for Teacher Librarians are explained on page 10.


https://sites.google.com/a/cps.edu/kc/reach-students/teacher-librarians

Additional Frameworks


FAQs

1. Q: Do Teacher-Librarians administer Performance Tasks and have student growth metrics

calculated into their summative REACH Students Ratings?

A: Yes, Teacher-Librarians’ summative REACH Students Ratings incorporate student growth metrics,

including Performance Tasks and Value-Added (Elementary School).

2. Q: Do Teacher-Librarians have their own REACH Framework?

A: Yes, the CPS Framework for Teacher-Librarians can be accessed in the Knowledge Center.

3. Q: Where can Teacher-Librarians access lesson plans and resources to support them in their professional practices?

A: There are resources that have been created by Teacher-Librarian Framework Specialists to

support professional practices. They are located on the Framework Specialist page on the

Knowledge Center.

4. Q: Where can Teacher-Librarians get additional support to assist them with Components of the CPS Framework for Teacher-Librarians?

A: Teacher-Librarians can contact Lisa Perez, Library Manager, at [email protected] or 773-553-

6212, to be put in touch with the library coordinator who supports their schools. The Department

of Literacy: Libraries offers a wide range of consultation and professional development

opportunities for librarians.



https://sites.google.com/a/cps.edu/kc/curriculum/instruction/framework-specialist-resource-database

http://kc.cps.edu/


mailto:[email protected]

Employment Consideration

Employment Considerations Evaluation Plans for Tenured Educators


Evaluation plans are determined by the educator’s tenure status and the previous year’s summative REACH Students Ratings.

Evaluation Plans for Annually Rated Tenured Educators in School Year

2016–2017 and Beyond

Evaluation Plans for Year 1 Biennially Rated Tenured

Educators in School Year 2016–2017 and Beyond

NOTE: In the event that a tenured educator in Year 2 of a Biennial Plan in 2015-16 received two observations in Year 1, but fewer than two in Year 2 his/her plan will be determined by an estimated score. All conducted observations and all available Student Growth scores from Year 1 and Year 2 will be used to determine an estimated REACH Student Rating.

1. If the educator’s estimated REACH Students Rating is Excellent or Proficient, then the educator

will receive a Proficient REACH Students Rating and start Year 1 of a new Biennial Plan in 2016-17.

2. If the educator’s estimated REACH Students Rating is Developing or Unsatisfactory, then the

educator will receive an Inability to Rate REACH Students Rating, default to his or her most recent

rating and will move to an Annual Plan in 2016-17. The educator will be placed on a PDP. © 2016,

Chicago Public Schools. All Rights Reserved.

Most Recent Summative REACH Students Rating

What happens the following school year?

Excellent and Proficient Move to the Biennial Plan

Developing Remain on an Annual Plan and on a Professional Development Plan

Unsatisfactory Placed on a Remediation Plan

Inability to Rate Educator will receive his/her previous rating and will remain on an Annual Plan.

Most Recent Summative REACH Students Rating

What happens the following school year?

Excellent and Proficient Remain on the Biennial Plan

Developing Move to an Annual Plan and placed into a Professional Development Plan

Unsatisfactory Placed on a Remediation Plan

Biennially rated educators with fewer than t wo

observations

Cycle will re-start in SY 2016–2017. Educator will be evaluated in SY 2016– 2017 and SY 2017–2018 and will receive a summative REACH Students

Rating in SY 2017–2018

Employment Considerations Probationary Appointed Teachers (PAT)


All PAT educators are assigned to an Annual Plan (3 Formal and 1 Informal) within one school year.

Those who receive a Developing and Unsatisfactory remain on Annual Plan (three Formal and one Informal) Based on Spring projections of Summative REACH Students Ratings, a principal may non-renew educators trending toward Developing or Unsatisfactory

If you are a Probationary Appointed Teacher (PAT), your current and prior summative REACH Students

Rating(s) have an impact on the acquisition of tenure.

For Probationary Appointed Teachers (PATs) hired before 7/1/13, the historical rules regarding tenure

acquisition remain in place through the 2016-17 School Year.

Tenure Acquisition for PATs Hired Before July 1, 2013

Tenure Status 2013–2014 2014–2016 2016–2017

PAT3 first hired for SY 2012–2013

Developing or higher

Developing* or higher

Tenured

*PAT3s who receive a summative REACH Students Rating of “Developing” and achieve tenure in the summer

before the start of the next school year will be on a Professional Development Plan for their first year as a

tenured educator. See pages 77-79 for more information about Professional Development Plans.

NOTE: An “Unsatisfactory” summative REACH Students Rating will not allow an educator to “count” that year towards tenure acquisition. Once final ratings are known, CPS will adjust tenure dates for probationary teachers deemed unsatisfactory.

For Probationary Appointed Teachers hired after 7/1/13, the achievement of tenure is now connected

to your summative REACH Students Rating.

New Tenure Rules for All Educators Hired After July 1, 2013

Scenario Type Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5

1 Accelerated 3 year track

Excellent Excellent Excellent Tenured

2 Proficient in Years 2 and 4


Proficient or higher



Tenured

3 Proficient in Years 3 and 4





Tenured

NOTE: An “Unsatisfactory” summative REACH Students Rating will not allow an educator to “count” that year towards tenure acquisition. Once final ratings are known, CPS will adjust tenure dates for probationary teachers deemed unsatisfactory.


Employment Considerations Summative REACH Ratings affect Layoffs and Non-Renewal


Order of Layoffs Summative REACH Students Ratings affect the order in which educators are laid off. Within a school and content area/certification and seniority within each category, educators are laid off in the following order:

Order Rating

1 All Unsatisfactory

2 TAT

3 PAT 210-250 (Emerging)

4 PAT Developing

5 PAT Proficient

6 PAT Excellent

7 Tenured (Emerging)

8 Tenured Developing

9 Tenured Proficient and Excellent

Non-Renewal

If you are a Probationary Appointed Teacher (PAT), your current summative REACH Students Rating(s)

may have an impact on whether you are subject to the non-renewal process. Principals may non-

renew PATs who are rated less than “Proficient.” PATs must be notified of their evaluator’s

recommendation of non-renewal no later than May 10, 2017.

Principals may not non-renew PATs who are rated “Proficient” or better and those PATs will be

renewed (but they are subject to layoff or displacement). This means that other circumstances may

occur at the end of the budget year that may require the displacement of staff. The contractual order

of layoffs can be found in Article 23-3.3 of the Agreement


Employment Considerations Professional Development Plan and Remediation Plan


Professional Development Plan

A Professional Development Plan (PD Plan) is required for tenured educators with a summative REACH

Students Rating of “Developing.” Tenured educators under all CPS Frameworks are subject to this

process.

Within 30 school days of receiving a summative REACH Students Rating of “Developing,” the educator

and current evaluator co-create the PD Plan. The PD Plan must be aligned to Framework components

in which the educator was rated less than “Proficient” and it must include district/school supports to

improve professional practice. The educator will remain on the PD Plan for one year. Progress towards

meeting the goals in the plan are reviewed during each step of the evaluation cycle.

Exiting the PD Plan:

If the educator’s 2016-17 summative REACH Students Rating is Excellent or Proficient, the PD Plan

is concluded and the educator moves to the Biennial Plan in 2017–17.

If the educator’s 2016-17 Professional Practice score OR REACH Students Total Points

increases numerically (but not to Proficient or Excellent), the educator receives a summative

REACH Students Rating of Developing. The educator receives a new PD Plan in 2017–18.

If the educator’s 2016-17 Professional Practice score AND REACH Students Total Points stay the

same or decrease numerically, the educator receives a summative REACH Students Rating of

Unsatisfactory. The educator then begins the remediation process in 2017–18.

Tenured Educators and Developing Ratings

Rating Evaluation Plan Evaluation Cycle Required interval between observations

First DEVELOPING rating Annual Plan with Professional

Development Plan

2 Formal and 2 Informal

1 calendar month

Second consecutive DEVELOPING rating with improvement (based on Professional

Practice OR Total Points score)

Annual Plan with Professional

Development Plan

2 Formal and 2 Informal

1 calendar month

Second consecutive DEVELOPING rating without improvement (based on

Professional Practice AND Total Points score)

Unsatisfactory rating with a Remediation Plan

2 Formal Per Remediation Plan guidelines




Remediation Plan

A Remediation Plan is required for tenured educators with a summative REACH Students Rating of

“Unsatisfactory.” Tenured educators under all Frameworks may be subject to this process.

Within 30 school days of receiving a summative REACH Students Rating of “Unsatisfactory,” the

educator, current evaluator, and consulting teacher create the Remediation Plan. The Remediation

Plan must be aligned to Framework components in which the educator was rated less than Proficient

and must include district/school supports to improve practice. In addition, a consulting teacher is

assigned to work with the educator during the term of the remediation period. The educator will

remain on the Remediation Plan for 90 school days of educator and student attendance.

During the course of the 90-day remediation period, the consulting teacher partners with the educator

undergoing remediation for 3–4 hours on a weekly basis to support professional growth. The educator

will be formally observed twice by the evaluator during the remediation period, once at the mid-point

and again at the end of the 90-day period. The mid-point observation will be used for formative

purposes to help the educator focus the second half of the remediation period on those areas of

practice most in need of development. The 90-day observation will determine whether he/she has

achieved proficiency. At the conclusion of the remediation period, the educator receives a summative

REACH Students Rating based on Professional Practice, using component-level ratings from the

observation.

For purposes of the remediation process, proficiency will be calculated using component-level ratings

of practice as determined by the evaluator’s final observation, as well as component-level ratings for

Components 4b–4e. Domain weightings will be applied consistent with current practice; student

growth scores are not considered when calculating the remediation summative REACH Students

Rating.

The process for exiting the Remediation Plan is as follows:

If the educator’s summative REACH Students Rating at the end of the remediation period is

Excellent or Proficient, the Remediation Plan is concluded. No additional REACH Student

observations are required. The educator will be placed on an Annual Plan for the following School

Year.

If, at the conclusion of the remediation period, the educator’s summative REACH Students Rating is

Developing or Unsatisfactory, dismissal proceedings will commence which may result in separation

from CPS employment.




The Professional Development and Remediation Plans are summarized in the table below.

Professional Development Plan

(Developing)

Remediation Plan

(Unsatisfactory)

Created Within 30 school days after summative REACH Students Rating is issued

Within 30 school days after summative REACH Students Rating is issued

Duration One school year 90 school days of educator and student attendance

Support • Includes support from the school/ district as described in PD Plan

• Evaluator & educator co-create plan • PD Plan reviewed at each REACH

observation

• Includes support from the school/district

• Includes the assignment of a consulting teacher who creates plan with evaluator and educator

• Two Formal Observations required during remediation time span; plan reviewed throughout the remediation period

Exiting the

Plan*

Remains on plan until summative REACH Students Rating increases to Proficient or Excellent

Requires a Proficient or Excellent rating on the last Formal Observation to maintain employment

*A tenured teacher on a Professional Development Plan who is rated “Developing” for two or more

consecutive years will be placed on a revised Professional Development Plan. A teacher whose REACH

Students Total Points are in the “Developing” range, but whose Professional Practice Points or REACH

Students Total Points do not improve from the prior evaluation will be rated “Unsatisfactory” and

placed on a Remediation Plan.


Employment Considerations Grievance and Appeal Process


Grievance Process

A grievance cannot be filed until after release of the REACH Students Evaluation Summary Report in the

Reflect and Learn System. Educators have 45 school days from receipt of the REACH Students Evaluation

Summary Report to file a grievance if he/she believes that a procedural mistake that could affect their overall

rating occurred during the evaluation process. The teacher may ask CTU for assistance with the Grievance

Process or file the grievance on his/her own. All grievances alleging procedural errors in the ratings process

should be filed directly with the Office of Employee Engagement at Central Office, and not with the

principal.

Appeals Process

Any educator who receives an “Unsatisfactory” summative REACH Students Rating may appeal to a 4 member

appeals committee of certified evaluators selected by CTU and CPS. Educators who wish to appeal must file a

Notice of Intent in the

Ref lect an d Lea rn Syst em within 10 days of receipt of their REACH Students Evaluation Summary Report and

then submit evidence related to the appeal within 30 days of receiving their REACH Students Evaluation

Summary Report. The filing of an appeal does not delay remediation or forestall any actions, such as non-

renewal or layoff, but if the appeal is won, any actions determined to be the result of a faulty rating will be

reversed.

Appellants will be asked to summarize the basis for their appeal and to provide evidence that falls into one or

more of the following areas:

Evidence used by evaluator does not match component scoring

Evidence used by evaluator is missing or not considered

Teachers did not have to opportunity to contribute their thoughts during Pre- or Post-Observation

Conferences

Ratings are based on observation notes that reflect evaluator bias, subjectivity, or interpretation

Student particularities and/or classroom needs were not addressed by evaluator

Evaluator is biased

Other

All PATs who receive an “Unsatisfactory” summative REACH Students Rating may file an appeal. If their appeal is

granted, the “Unsatisfactory” summative REACH Students Rating will be replaced with an Emerging rating of 250

which is the lower part of “Developing.”

The “Developing” summative REACH Students Rating will not reverse a non-renewal. If the appeal is denied the

“Unsatisfactory” summative REACH Students Rating stands.

All tenured educators who receive an “Unsatisfactory” summative REACH Students Rating may file an appeal. If

their appeal is granted, the “Unsatisfactory” summative REACH Students Rating will be replaced with an Emerging

rating of 250 which is the lower part of “Developing.”

A Professional Development Plan will replace their Remediation Plan for the remainder of the school year. For

details about the Appeals Process, see Article 39-9 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement. © 2016, Chicago Public Schools. All Rights Reserved.



Employment Considerations Grievance and Appeal Process


1. Q: Are Temporarily Assigned Teachers (TATs) evaluated under REACH Students? Does time

worked as a TAT count toward tenure? A: TATs are no longer evaluated under REACH Students and time worked does not count towards tenure.

2. Q: Do previously tenured teachers who become part-time teachers lose their tenure?

A: Yes, they do. Part-time teachers cannot achieve tenure while working part-time and have no tenure rights while in part-time status. Formerly tenured teachers who become part-time will have tenured restored when they return to a full-time permanent position if: (1) they return to a full- time permanent teaching position without a break in service; or, (2) they return to a full-time permanent teacher position after an involuntary break-in-service (i.e., a layoff or honorable termination) of no more than 2 years; or, (3) they return to a full-time teacher position after a voluntary break-in-service (i.e., a resignation) of no more than one calendar year. A “break in service” means any separation from any CPS employment (regardless of length of time). As described above, the consequences to a teacher’s tenure status depend on whether the break in service is voluntary or involuntary and the length of the break.

3. Q: What if I received fewer than the required number of observations in the 2015–16 School Year?

A: These educators are classified as “Inability to Rate.” “No Rating” is assigned if an educator has not worked sufficient days during the school year.

Tenured educators in 2016-17 will restart the same Evaluation Plan as 20145–16.

When a PAT is classified as “Inability to Rate,” the PAT defaults to a Proficient rating.

Tenured educators on an ANNUAL Plan will restart a one-year cycle and will receive a summative REACH Students Rating in September 2017.

Tenured educators in Year 1 of a BIENNIAL Plan will begin the two-year cycle again and will receive a summative REACH Students Rating in September 2018. *Tenured educators in Year 2 of a BIENNIAL Plan please reference page 74 for more information.

PAT1 and PAT2 will remain on an Annual Plan which is a one-year cycle and will receive a summative REACH Students Rating in September 2017.

Hired Prior to 7/1/2013 PAT3 becomes tenured and is placed on an Evaluation Plan according to his or her hire date (see pages 27). If the educator is on an Annual Plan, he or she will receive a Summative REACH Rating in September 2017. If the educator is on a Biennial Plan, he or she will receive a summative REACH Rating in September 2018. Hired after 7/1/2013 Educator moves to a PAT4 status and continues on an Annual Plan (3 Formal and 1 Informal )


Professional Learning Resources

Resources


Knowledge Center: kc.cps.edu

Access resources for

REACH protocols and

processes, Framework for

Teaching professional

learning and Content Area

supports using the drop-

down menu at the top.

Resources


CTU Quest Center PD • All CTU Quest Center

offerings are driven

by the components

of the CPS

Framework for

Teaching

• Upcoming offerings

with descriptions are

posted on

www.ctunet.com/pd,

advertised in the

Chicago Union

ahTeacher

newspaper, sent

through CTU e-blasts,

and found on the CPS

Knowledge Center

For more information contact

CTU Quest Center Professional Development Facilitator

Theresa Insalaco-DeCicco, M.Ed. NBCT (312) 329-6270

http://www.ctunet.com/pd



Chicago Public Schools Vision

Every Chicago Public Schools student in every neighborhood

will be engaged in a rigorous, well-rounded instructional program and will graduate prepared for success in college, career and life.

Chicago Public Schools

42 West Madison Street

Chicago, Illinois 60602

cps.edu